The Big Picture: The Amazing Spider-Man - The Gwen Stacy Paradox

[The Harkinator]

Soooo..... who will be playing Mary Jane in the next one? Obviously she won't show up straight away because we'll see Peter mope around for a bit feeling sorry for himself but just a little while into the second act we'll probably see her show up and by the end of the third one it'll be "Gwen who?"

 

[Azure23]

Very good episode, Bob. I think what the movie does kind of ruins it for me.

Spoiler

In TASM2, Gwen gets LOTS of development in the movie. She tells Peter off for being a wishy-washy boyfriend, she helps Peter defeat Electro, gets interviews to Oxford and really comes out of her shell. But, she just dies in the last 15 (I think) minutes of the movie, Peter mopes for like 5 minutes (which the movies states is 5 months) and Peter gets her graduation ceremony pep talk and becomes Spider-man again just in time when Rhino was going on a rampage. Besides the convienence, it seems to me, Gwen gets all the late-game development so that the audience can have a reaction to her death. This is not character building for the sake of good character, but to get an emotional rise out of the audience.

What I want to know is how comics were able to get away with Gwen's death. Like you said, Bob, most of us thought of Gwen as another origin death. But, given this character's significance for her death, if comics were to kill a love interest nowadays, or even a character, you'd almost bet your bottom dollar that character would get revived or there'd be a huge protest about it. (Remember #Bringbrianback?) So, how were comics, back then, able to kill off Gwen without some sort of retcon trying to bring her back, and if they were to kill a character now, how do they make sure that character stays dead without an online petition/protest popping up?

And that right there is why I got into creator owned books. No Marvel or DC shareholders to answer to, no status quo to maintain. Image comics is actually killing it these days (sure they were shit twenty years ago, I blame Liefeld). They've got Prophet (the excellent reboot, not the weird, religious liefeld one), Invincible (it really is the best superhero book in the universe), The Walking Dead, Fatale, Chew, and motherfucking SAGA! These are some of the best books out there right now in my opinion. Just some recommendations if you're getting tired of endlessly resurrected superhero's and frozen in time characters then maybe check out some creator owned books. More creative freedom can only be a good thing right?

I'd especially recommend Invincible if you want a superhero comic that isn't afraid to make big changes to characters or kill them off. I promise you that no hero in Invincible is killed and then just resurrected by some bullshit (except for the Immortal but that's his deal). plus the artwork and coloring just keep getting better and better, with Kirkman's awesome writing talent to tie the whole thing together. Strongly recommended.

 

[Raku-Gosha]

Very good episode, Bob. I think what the movie does kind of ruins it for me.

Spoiler

In TASM2, Gwen gets LOTS of development in the movie. She tells Peter off for being a wishy-washy boyfriend, she helps Peter defeat Electro, gets interviews to Oxford and really comes out of her shell. But, she just dies in the last 15 (I think) minutes of the movie, Peter mopes for like 5 minutes (which the movies states is 5 months) and Peter gets her graduation ceremony pep talk and becomes Spider-man again just in time when Rhino was going on a rampage. Besides the convienence, it seems to me, Gwen gets all the late-game development so that the audience can have a reaction to her death. This is not character building for the sake of good character, but to get an emotional rise out of the audience.

What I want to know is how comics were able to get away with Gwen's death. Like you said, Bob, most of us thought of Gwen as another origin death. But, given this character's significance for her death, if comics were to kill a love interest nowadays, or even a character, you'd almost bet your bottom dollar that character would get revived or there'd be a huge protest about it. (Remember #Bringbrianback?) So, how were comics, back then, able to kill off Gwen without some sort of retcon trying to bring her back, and if they were to kill a character now, how do they make sure that character stays dead without an online petition/protest popping up?

Great post, thanks for sharing. Only one thing I'd like to remark on. Isn't that how it's always been though when it comes to deaths in entertainment minor character or otherwise(your question in the spoiler box)? Several immediate examples come to mind when I think about a character who's died minor or otherwise they get a significant boost in their screen time as opposed to what you normally get of them and the episodes/stories are usually filled with:

Flashbacks- They use this time to remind/tell the viewer the characters background/history/motivations etc.

Hope for the Future- They sometimes like to lead you on by giving the character sudden importance in the story or giving them something to look forward to (cementing a relationship with family/lover/friends overcoming a character arc etc)

Tying up their loose ends- They have the character accomplish their goals, or just tidy up any and all loose ends with the character as not to leave and plot holes or questions

Making more loose ends- They will also try to lead you on by creating more plot threads with the character only to kill them off and leave more questions than answers.

Seems pretty standard to me, unless I'm getting something wrong.


As to your second question, specifically for comics authors deal with protest and fan intervention with two tools. Deus ex Machina and universe reboots (Marvel and DC are experiencing one now) to subvert or undo any major implications or they'll play it off as a dream sequence/different reality. Though with Gwen specifically Bob stated she wasn't much of a character to begin with during her run in the comic she was practically a "See he's not Gay" badge.

 

[Sniper Team 4]

I remember when I first heard about Gwen. She was in the Spectacular Spider-Man cartoon show that Disney was airing a few years ago. I watched it because I thought it was great, but when Gwen showed up, I remember going, "Who is she? Peter's supposed to like Mary Jane." So I went and looked it up. I was shocked to find out that she died years ago in the comics, and that her death was actually how Mary Jane and Peter started to bond. Needless to say, I wanted to see if she was going to die in the cartoon now, especially when Mary Jane showed up, but the show disappeared shortly after.

When I saw that she was in these movies though, I knew she was going to die. I wonder how they're going to do it, but I think it would be more shocking if she didn't die. Talk about throwing a curve ball at fans.

 

[Strain42]

I'm honestly bothered whenever anyone makes the argument that liking Raimi's Spider-man over TASM is wrong, because both series get things wrong, and are thus equally bad, or that ASM is an improvement. The thing is that Raimi's Spider-man came out in the 2000s, when the X-men looked more like a boy band than a superhero team(and were proud of it), Doctor Doom had super powers, and Galactus was a set of angry looking clouds, and while Raimi's Spider-man was never perfect it stood head and shoulders above the competition (Except of course, for casting). The Amazing Spider-man...... doesn't have any of those things going for it.

Conversely, I'm honestly bothered whenever people say "Yeah, Spider-Man wasn't that good of a film by today's standards, but it was so much better than the other crap of the day" as an excuse for Raimi botching the casting, villains (well, the majority of the villains) and to be brutally honest, letting himself be too "Raimi" with his trademark bullshit camera angles and zooms(yet Bob find's JJ Abrams' lens flare so annoying) and intentionally hammy acting.

Just because the competition was worse doesn't make Spider-Man a great film.

While I won't defend ALL of the casting of Raimi's Spiderman, I will defend JK Simmons as J. Jonah Jameson and Alfred Molina as Dr. Octopus to the grave. They were both phenomenal, and that's why of all four Spiderman movies that I've seen so far, Spiderman 2 is the only one I've actually liked.

However, currently speaking there isn't anyone I can really say is great casting from the ASM universe. Jamie Foxx admittedly may change that but that's because Foxx is a good actor.

 

[Raesvelg]

While I won't defend ALL of the casting of Raimi's Spiderman, I will defend JK Simmons as J. Jonah Jameson and Alfred Molina as Dr. Octopus to the grave. They were both phenomenal, and that's why of all four Spiderman movies that I've seen so far, Spiderman 2 is the only one I've actually liked.

However, currently speaking there isn't anyone I can really say is great casting from the ASM universe. Jamie Foxx admittedly may change that but that's because Foxx is a good actor.

While JK Simmons was about as close as you could get visually speaking, again, that's where Raimi's overly hammy approach ruined the character for me. And while Molina stole the show in Spider-Man 2, what killed it for me (again) was Raimi; too hammy in spots, and Raimi's stubborn insistence on making all of his "villains" into tragic characters. Yeah, Doc Ock's origin story is moderately tragic. But what happens after that is the classic trope of Spider-Man villains: once they get power, they abuse it.

Raimi's Doc Ock gets controlled by his robot arms and is still really just trying to make the world a better place by creating a fusion reactor. It simultaneously dilutes the character and removes all responsibility for his actions.

 

[Gerardo Vazquez]

Well...

Spoiler

Yeah, she dies in TASM2. And, yeah, she dies as a result of Peter's attempt to save her life.

I, like every other comic fan in the audience, knew it was coming. But, for me at least, it still worked. It was sudden, it was brutal, and Garfield's performance that followed was just the final, bitter cherry on the top of the melancholic ice cream.

But what made it work even more for me was what followed (to a degree... could do with fewer stupid kids in costumes, thanks). Instead of having Peter go dark and twisted and swear revenge, they actually show him mourning her... y'know, like a real person would. The loss affects him so much he actually gives up being Spidey altogether until some kind words from May and a listen to Gwen's graduation day speech gets him back out on the street in the spandex.

That's why that moment worked for me. Peter's not going back out to fight crime to avenge Gwen Stacy, he's going back out there to honour her.

But, who am I kidding? Bob will hate it, no doubt.

Spoiler

Especially that shot of Peter's webbing stretching out a "mini-hand" toward Gwen as she falls

I have to say I enjoyed Garfield's spiderman a lot more than the Maguire version, which (while really well acted) was way too mopey and fragile, with none of the confident sark that Spidey is known for and Garfield is able to pull off without seeming like a prick.

However, I also have no doubt Bob will hate it, this preview of his thoughts already betray an awful lot of bias towards hating the movie however it comes out (and while I enjoyed the movie; it's best watched with no prior knowledge or expectations, it has it's flaws, and won't be enough to change the mind of someone who already has their heart set against it.)

Spoiler

Still, part of me is looking forward to the ultimate ragefest that will inevitably fall upon us when he actually reviews it - how Gwen constantly getting in harms way was the most contrived thing ever, how the use of the Green Goblin as sequel bait heralds everything wrong with modern studio greed, how it was the worst ever advertising lies that the Rhino is only in it for a few seconds, etc.
I get a weird kick out of reading hyperbolic rage threads.
I just hope he tops his statement from the last Amazing Spiderman review where he took time to emphasis that the crane sequence was the dumbest scene he'd ever seen in movie history ever EVER. That was awesomely unfair.

Remember kids, if someone doesn't like something that you like it's not that what you like is "bad", they're just "biased".

 

[Mr. Q]

Honestly, the only times I found Gwen Stacy interesting was outside the 616 Marvel Universe. Mainly the Ultimate Spider-Man comics and the Spectacular Spider-Man animated series. With those two, Gwen had some depth and meaning. Sadly, Ultimate Spider-Man did kill her off only to bring her back (don't ask how, its convoluted) and we all know what happened to Spectacular Spider-Man.

But, yeah, the idea of bringing in Gwen Stacy into the movies just to kill her off is not a good selling point. Still, that never stopped Sony from running a bad idea into the ground.

 

[Autumnflame]

You two make a good point, but those scenes where also added into the dvd and Blu-ray release of both movies, where as I doubt the "you're being watched" scene will be for ASM2 given how it would distract from the real plot too much.[/quote]

Your still wrong about the first Amazing spider man movie Bob. It was good. Not great but it had some truly amazing moments and competent cinematography.

Your still wrong about the first Amazing spider man movie Bob. It was good. Not great but it had some truly amazing moments and competent cinematography.

A well executed movie that happens to feature Spiderman doesn not make it a good Spider man film.

as a film unrealted to spider man there were some good aspects.

As a Spiderman film it ruined the characters with its re imagining. and provided little in the way of enjoyment for long term Spidey fans.

Unlike the Dark Knight saga who reinvented batman from the ground up and did it right.

 

[Redd the Sock]

Given how much was pulled from the ultimate line, I actually have had some hope for Gwen. Her first appearance there was a 2 page author insert rant about how she viewed people's fears of mutants as a fear that people better than they were had come along, and they'd have to get up off their ass and work to succeed now instead of watching cartoons and phoning life in. Her next was pulling a knife on a bully beating up Peter in the school hallway. She's had ups and downs since, but she was one of the few improvements in the line over the original.

On the other hand, even since the 90s cartoon, Goblin + girl + bridge = bye bye girl, or at least the threat thereof, so like the Winter Soldier's identity, it wouldn't be much of a spoiler or surprise in doing so. I mean, it keeps happening, even when Mary Jane is used as the girl of the day, so I doubt it's because Gwen was so limited, but people doing these movies have a strong desire to film iconic moments.

 

[emeraldrafael]

I feel like them doing the Symbiote Suit will be bad because they're going to learn the lesson from Spiderman 3 (which really I didn't mind and thought was pretty good). They're going to turn peter into an even more insufferable twat with the suit and its going ot be just as bad.

 

[Gerardo Vazquez]

The paradox with Gwen Stacey is she, like several other major comic character deaths, was and always will be far more interesting dead then alive. Dead she drove the story and provided meaning to the hero. She joins a short list of characters who really and truly were better off dead.

Barry Allen's Flash. Lets be honest with ourselves. Barry Allen is a nice guy. But for the fastest man alive he was boring as hell. There was nothing going on internally there. he was a true hero in every aspect of the word. His sacrifice led to a much better story. That of his much more deeply flawed sidekick Wally West taking up the mantle and struggling in every way with living up to Barry's memory and example. Wally was interesting. Wally was human. Bringing Barry back and then finally just wiping Wally from continuity was just the height of fanboy dullness. Because it once was so must it always be and always return to. The even sadder thing with Barry Allen was there was never any clear reason to bring him back. Because of the weird time looping nature of his life or death he was still available for short use if needed for a story.

Jason Todd's Robin. Dear Gods! Jason alive was a painfully awful character. In at least two separate incarnations. So much so that the fans voted to kill the little sh@t. Dead he was a driving force on Batman's psyche. Something both pushing him further into the darkness and holding him back. A narrow line that could snap at any moment. It added to the characters around him. Returning him as the "Red Hood". Like a poor mans Punisher ripoff. Ugh! No weight. No consequence. Nothing good came out of it.

Bucky. Bucky's death haunted and drove Captain America for years. Plus it was Stan Lee's ultimate FU to the very concept of "kid sidekicks" and child endangerment. It set the boundaries not just for the individual character, but the entire universe. 'Kids Do Not Belong in This Game!" Now to be fair, Brubakers return of Bucky in The winter Soldier was probably the most brilliant and succesful of all of these major character resurrections. Just as Gwen's death was a soft reboot of Spiderman, Bucky's rebirth was for Captain America. Brubaker never took away the loss, the sacrifice or the danger of the characters initial death. If anything he amped it up and added to its overall weight. The fact that both in comics and in our world everyone had almost 50 years between the events did not hurt. But it still had effects that did not outweigh the power and purpose of having the character die and leaving them dead.

Jean Grey, Pheonix. Ugh! Probably the second most powerful single comic death story after Death of Gwen Stacey. and by far the absolute worst Resurrection, and death again, and resurrection, and death again etc etc etc. Granted the character is called Pheonix, but damn. It is almost the best case study of the inmates running the asylum. Fans in house could not let go, and hence marketing kept bringing her back.

And then there is Gwen Stacey. Literally brought back because the editor in chief liked her better than the more developed and maturing better known Spidey Significant other. And brought back via a literal deal with the devil. Her return in comics was perhaps the biggest screw you to three full generations of comic fans in order to appease a handful of aging baby boomers who wanted the world back the way it was. There is so much social commentary and so much of an unwanted deep reveal of the current state of our society reflected there that it really is disturbing.

I kind of hope she dies in this movie. (Not that I plan on paying to see it in the theater. I am more than a little sick of Sony giving me the same recycled story over and over and over.) At least then maybe just maybe one run of the movies or Spiderman in some media will be allowed to grow a bit. (Ah who am I kidding this one will be rebooted with a new edgy hispanic black gay jewish kid or somesuch as Spiderman within 18 months tops. Just because the marketing department will go and get drunk again. (probably the same three day bender that leads to the creation of "Silk"!))

Few nitpicks with this list
A. Barry Allen like Bucky is one of the few exceptions to the "Better off dead rule". Barry was an interesting, and full fledged character in his own right, with great villains, a rich history, and tons of nice supporting characters. His death did tons of great things for the Flash comics, but it's iffy to say he's "better off dead", as far I'm concerned dead or alive is fine by me, but yeah the whole "wiping Wally out of existence thing" bothers me too.

B. Every needs to just get over Miles Morales already. Seriously. Just. Get. Over it. That being said I don't have high hopes for Silk either, for a lot of reasons.

 

[faefrost]

The paradox with Gwen Stacey is she, like several other major comic character deaths, was and always will be far more interesting dead then alive. Dead she drove the story and provided meaning to the hero. She joins a short list of characters who really and truly were better off dead.

Barry Allen's Flash. Lets be honest with ourselves. Barry Allen is a nice guy. But for the fastest man alive he was boring as hell. There was nothing going on internally there. he was a true hero in every aspect of the word. His sacrifice led to a much better story. That of his much more deeply flawed sidekick Wally West taking up the mantle and struggling in every way with living up to Barry's memory and example. Wally was interesting. Wally was human. Bringing Barry back and then finally just wiping Wally from continuity was just the height of fanboy dullness. Because it once was so must it always be and always return to. The even sadder thing with Barry Allen was there was never any clear reason to bring him back. Because of the weird time looping nature of his life or death he was still available for short use if needed for a story.

Jason Todd's Robin. Dear Gods! Jason alive was a painfully awful character. In at least two separate incarnations. So much so that the fans voted to kill the little sh@t. Dead he was a driving force on Batman's psyche. Something both pushing him further into the darkness and holding him back. A narrow line that could snap at any moment. It added to the characters around him. Returning him as the "Red Hood". Like a poor mans Punisher ripoff. Ugh! No weight. No consequence. Nothing good came out of it.

Bucky. Bucky's death haunted and drove Captain America for years. Plus it was Stan Lee's ultimate FU to the very concept of "kid sidekicks" and child endangerment. It set the boundaries not just for the individual character, but the entire universe. 'Kids Do Not Belong in This Game!" Now to be fair, Brubakers return of Bucky in The winter Soldier was probably the most brilliant and succesful of all of these major character resurrections. Just as Gwen's death was a soft reboot of Spiderman, Bucky's rebirth was for Captain America. Brubaker never took away the loss, the sacrifice or the danger of the characters initial death. If anything he amped it up and added to its overall weight. The fact that both in comics and in our world everyone had almost 50 years between the events did not hurt. But it still had effects that did not outweigh the power and purpose of having the character die and leaving them dead.

Jean Grey, Pheonix. Ugh! Probably the second most powerful single comic death story after Death of Gwen Stacey. and by far the absolute worst Resurrection, and death again, and resurrection, and death again etc etc etc. Granted the character is called Pheonix, but damn. It is almost the best case study of the inmates running the asylum. Fans in house could not let go, and hence marketing kept bringing her back.

And then there is Gwen Stacey. Literally brought back because the editor in chief liked her better than the more developed and maturing better known Spidey Significant other. And brought back via a literal deal with the devil. Her return in comics was perhaps the biggest screw you to three full generations of comic fans in order to appease a handful of aging baby boomers who wanted the world back the way it was. There is so much social commentary and so much of an unwanted deep reveal of the current state of our society reflected there that it really is disturbing.

I kind of hope she dies in this movie. (Not that I plan on paying to see it in the theater. I am more than a little sick of Sony giving me the same recycled story over and over and over.) At least then maybe just maybe one run of the movies or Spiderman in some media will be allowed to grow a bit. (Ah who am I kidding this one will be rebooted with a new edgy hispanic black gay jewish kid or somesuch as Spiderman within 18 months tops. Just because the marketing department will go and get drunk again. (probably the same three day bender that leads to the creation of "Silk"!))

Few nitpicks with this list
A. Barry Allen like Bucky is one of the few exceptions to the "Better off dead rule". Barry was an interesting, and full fledged character in his own right, with great villains, a rich history, and tons of nice supporting characters. His death did tons of great things for the Flash comics, but it's iffy to say he's "better off dead", as far I'm concerned dead or alive is fine by me, but yeah the whole "wiping Wally out of existence thing" bothers me too.

B. Every needs to just get over Miles Morales already. Seriously. Just. Get. Over it. That being said I don't have high hopes for Silk either, for a lot of reasons.

Don't get me wrong. I love Barry Allen. I just felt he was a stronger character in that sort of semi "still dead" state that Crisis left him in. The Flash was a great concept. The rogues gallery is one of the best in comics. But Barry himself was just a bit bland for much of his runs. That interplay with him being dead and/or sort of running through time popping up every now and them, and Wally trying to fill his shoes was just head and shoulders so much better and deeper than anything that came before involving the Flash character, save perhaps his time in Crisis on Infinite Earths. I don't hate Barry. I don't want him dead. But I think he did more for the overall story and books playing the Obi Wan role.

And it's not necessarily Miles Morales. I don't have any personal animosity towards the character or his story. Although Miles kind of hits on a few cheesy and stupid modern comic company moves. So much so that it demands comment. Miles himself was a reasonably well written character. But he was permanently crippled by two facts involving his book and characters creation. The first was the rather horrific killing off of Peter Parker in the Ultimate books, which offended fans in a number of ways. Ultimate Spider Man had been the single longest and most consistent take on the Spider Man character ever. One writer and two artists through 20+ volumes. even though it was in the side Ultimate Universe and not the regular Marvel Universe it still captured everything the fans wanted. But the end felt like a cheesy publicity stunt. Killing off a character to simply drum up publicity and force a change without having a strong underlying story basis. Plus it was the brutal killing of a 16 year old protagonist. It was one of those decision point moments with comics readers that rarely work well for the publisher (see; One More Day, New 52). Then they "replaced" Peter with Miles. Who while a good well written hire just reeked of "change for diversities sake". Miles would have been a great character, if they had given him his own new name and his own new book. But they bolted the Spider Man name on him. It didn't go over well with a lot of fans. This scheme didn't work well with the Death of Superman and it didn't work well here. It felt like story being sacrificed for marketing and editorial concerns. And fans tend to HATE that.

 

[Gerardo Vazquez]

And it's not necessarily Miles Morales. I don't have any personal animosity towards the character or his story. Although Miles kind of hits on a few cheesy and stupid modern comic company moves. So much so that it demands comment. Miles himself was a reasonably well written character. But he was permanently crippled by two facts involving his book and characters creation. The first was the rather horrific killing off of Peter Parker in the Ultimate books, which offended fans in a number of ways. Ultimate Spider Man had been the single longest and most consistent take on the Spider Man character ever. One writer and two artists through 20+ volumes. even though it was in the side Ultimate Universe and not the regular Marvel Universe it still captured everything the fans wanted. But the end felt like a cheesy publicity stunt. Killing off a character to simply drum up publicity and force a change without having a strong underlying story basis. Plus it was the brutal killing of a 16 year old protagonist. It was one of those decision point moments with comics readers that rarely work well for the publisher (see; One More Day, New 52). Then they "replaced" Peter with Miles. Who while a good well written hire just reeked of "change for diversities sake". Miles would have been a great character, if they had given him his own new name and his own new book. But they bolted the Spider Man name on him. It didn't go over well with a lot of fans. This scheme didn't work well with the Death of Superman and it didn't work well here. It felt like story being sacrificed for marketing and editorial concerns. And fans tend to HATE that.

Partially agree for the most part. It would have overall been a better idea to give Miles his own book(Ala Scarlet Spider), than have him take over Peter's. His skin color, one way or the other doesn't really matter to me though.

 

[Gerardo Vazquez]

I'm honestly bothered whenever anyone makes the argument that liking Raimi's Spider-man over TASM is wrong, because both series get things wrong, and are thus equally bad, or that ASM is an improvement. The thing is that Raimi's Spider-man came out in the 2000s, when the X-men looked more like a boy band than a superhero team(and were proud of it), Doctor Doom had super powers, and Galactus was a set of angry looking clouds, and while Raimi's Spider-man was never perfect it stood head and shoulders above the competition (Except of course, for casting). The Amazing Spider-man...... doesn't have any of those things going for it.

Conversely, I'm honestly bothered whenever people say "Yeah, Spider-Man wasn't that good of a film by today's standards, but it was so much better than the other crap of the day" as an excuse for Raimi botching the casting, villains (well, the majority of the villains) and to be brutally honest, letting himself be too "Raimi" with his trademark bullshit camera angles and zooms(yet Bob find's JJ Abrams' lens flare so annoying) and intentionally hammy acting.

Just because the competition was worse doesn't make Spider-Man a great film.

Neither film is what I'd would call a proper Spider-man adaptation, but until one actually comes along I'll stick with the film where Spider-man actually looks like Spider-man, and the day isn't saved by The Crane Workers Union.

 

[daxterx2005]

Peter had a gf named liz huh?

 

[ExtraDebit]

A major plot hole spoiled the whole movie for me.

Spoiler

Gwen die due to spiderman try to grab her with his web and he did that just before she touch the ground but the force of her fall was so great that it snap her spine, And here's the plot hole: spiderman's web grab her shirt.....the force of her fall was powerful enough to snap her spine but was not enough to tear the shirt off her back? that doesn't make sense! at least in the comics it was webbed to her legs.

Just watch the movie, it looks even more ridiculous than my description, the web literally just grab the front part of her shirt, not her jacket, not a super strong leather shirt but a cotton shirt!

I think the greatest flaws of the new spiderman reboot is the casting, specifically peter parker, that dude can't ACT! even aunt may did better acting than that guy. He just got no charisma.

 

[WarpZone]

The Amazing Spider-Man - The Gwen Stacy Paradox

MovieBob takes a look at one of Spider-Man's iconic characters - and her unfortunate destiny throughout the series.

Watch Video

Frankly I hope the movie flops and Spider Man movies continue to Police Academy until Sony has no choice but to sell or revert the rights back to Marvel. The reason I hope that is because I think it's basically our only shot at getting to see an actually GOOD Spider man movie again. Spidey in Avengers 3 would just be icing on the cake.

 

[Hero in a half shell]

Well...

Spoiler

Yeah, she dies in TASM2. And, yeah, she dies as a result of Peter's attempt to save her life.

I, like every other comic fan in the audience, knew it was coming. But, for me at least, it still worked. It was sudden, it was brutal, and Garfield's performance that followed was just the final, bitter cherry on the top of the melancholic ice cream.

But what made it work even more for me was what followed (to a degree... could do with fewer stupid kids in costumes, thanks). Instead of having Peter go dark and twisted and swear revenge, they actually show him mourning her... y'know, like a real person would. The loss affects him so much he actually gives up being Spidey altogether until some kind words from May and a listen to Gwen's graduation day speech gets him back out on the street in the spandex.

That's why that moment worked for me. Peter's not going back out to fight crime to avenge Gwen Stacy, he's going back out there to honour her.

But, who am I kidding? Bob will hate it, no doubt.

Spoiler

Especially that shot of Peter's webbing stretching out a "mini-hand" toward Gwen as she falls

I have to say I enjoyed Garfield's spiderman a lot more than the Maguire version, which (while really well acted) was way too mopey and fragile, with none of the confident sark that Spidey is known for and Garfield is able to pull off without seeming like a prick.

However, I also have no doubt Bob will hate it, this preview of his thoughts already betray an awful lot of bias towards hating the movie however it comes out (and while I enjoyed the movie; it's best watched with no prior knowledge or expectations, it has it's flaws, and won't be enough to change the mind of someone who already has their heart set against it.)

Spoiler

Still, part of me is looking forward to the ultimate ragefest that will inevitably fall upon us when he actually reviews it - how Gwen constantly getting in harms way was the most contrived thing ever, how the use of the Green Goblin as sequel bait heralds everything wrong with modern studio greed, how it was the worst ever advertising lies that the Rhino is only in it for a few seconds, etc.
I get a weird kick out of reading hyperbolic rage threads.
I just hope he tops his statement from the last Amazing Spiderman review where he took time to emphasis that the crane sequence was the dumbest scene he'd ever seen in movie history ever EVER. That was awesomely unfair.

Remember kids, if someone doesn't like something that you like it's not that what you like is "bad", they're just "biased".

I enjoyed Garfield's Spiderman. It wasn't perfect, but it was entertaining, and in my opinion the good outweighs the bad by a large margin. If someone else didn't enjoy it I can understand why and probably emphasis with many of their reasons (because there are legitimate problems with the new Spiderman reboot).
However. Specifically speaking about Bob's previous review work he has been known to be... overzealous in stating his reasons for why a movie or game he didn't personally like was bad, and when he gets into a proper rant will often declare that these problems are the worst ever in the industry.

(spoilered for rant content)

Spoiler

A perfect example of this is his last Spiderman review, which he describes in his opening review statement as a

"rancid, terrible, stiflingly inept torturous to sit through piece of s**t whose every second of it's unforgivably overlong running time feels like the worst kind of passionless, cynical, mechanical, soul-less assembly line commercially focused corporate filmmaking, precisely because it is the worst kind of passionless cynical, mechanical, soul-less assembly line commercially focused corporate filmmaking"

Now, I can think of a few films that were more commercially focused [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformers:_Revenge_of_the_Fallen], more passionless [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragonball_Evolution], and more mechanical, soul-less assembly line [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superhero_Movie] drivel. The new Spiderman reboot is not the worst offender of any of these categories by far, but according to Bobs review, it's the worst ever!

Later he describes the crane sequence as

"Literally the stupidest thing that has ever happened in a Spideman movie"

complete with all caps STUPID coming up on the screen and a booming voice effect for emphasis. Worse than Emo Spiderman Saturday Night Fever stutting about the town? Worse than punching Mary Jane in the face? Worse than the constant Spiderman in front of giant super-fake CGI American flag scenes in every previous Spiderman movie?

I'll also give an honorable mention to his Halo is racist and evil video, for basically framing the entire Halo series as the work of white supremacists in an epic rant.

I should end with the disclaimer that I enjoy Moviebob's reviews I even enjoy the entertainment value of his rants, and the man really knows his stuff about cinema, but whether a piece of work is good or bad, he often goes slightly overboard when he does reviews of something he really dislikes.