Yep, Amazing Spider-Man 2 Cast/Crew Would Like A Marvel Crossover

[Vausch]

just wana point out that it was the script that sucked not the acting. Hell im a fan of ultimate spiderman and this guy acts exactly the same as spidy does in that comic, wise cracking and using web shooters.

Agree, and that's precisely why I'm a fan of Garfield as Spidey and wish he could be Spidey in better movies within the MCU.

EDIT: adding that this also illustrates how much better Superhero movies can be when the filmmakers don't have to pretend the world only has one hero.

I have a feeling Disney's just going to gobble up all the marvel rights as soon as they get done integrating the star wars brand into their kingdom, and trust me if anyone can just ***** slap sony off the movie rights it'll be Disney.

Don't Disney already own Marvel? And so have the rights to everything that wasn't sold to Sony/Fox/whoever else.

they own the rights to all the characters in print but sony and fox own the movie rights at the moment. Now I think they might be able to get back the rights if sony or fox basically screw up the franchise to the point of embarrassment therefore breaking the terms of sell, but if spiderman 3 didn't do that I doubt anything else would.

OK seriously, Spiderman 3 was not that bad. It had flaws but at least it was aware of its source material and Peter wasn't being portrayed as what hollywood execs think geeks and nerds are. AMS had Peter look more like a wannabe hipster than anything else.

Spiderman 3 was the highest grossing movie of the original trilogy. Raimi and Maguire were on board and the 4th movie was set to be filmed, but due to scheduling conflicts with both of them they weren't able to work on the project soon enough and there was risk of the movie rights returning to Marvel studios. So rather than just continue the franchise with a different actor and director (Al-la the Iron Man franchise with Shane Black and Don Cheadle) they opted to reboot it because reasons.

ok first off amazing spidrman actually is more faithful to the comic then the 3 spiderman films that proceeded it, the character is the younger spiderman who is known for his wise cracking till after a certain event happens and he grows more serious. next we have the fact that ramai declined to come back due to problems with the studio were he wanted to do mistirio and they wanted carnage. Last but not least it was only the top grossing of the trilogy at launch if we follow it to the dvd sells its actually the worst selling of the three.

Yes, and it still ripped bits from the Raimi movies and made Peter into what I could only describe as a wannabe hipster. Little things about his portrayal just kept bugging me, like the fact that he didn't actually wear glasses and just decided to put his dad's on one day (prescription? What's that?). I will admit Raimi didn't keep the wise-cracks of Spiderman and it suffered for that, but Tobey Maguire was definitely a better Peter. Overall AMS felt more like Batman Begins rather than Spiderman.

They were still on board at first and could have continued the franchise if they needed to. The reboot was unnecessary.

Still made near a billion with the DVD sales. That's far from a flop and easily enough to justify a 4th.

Sales=/=good.

I'll give you Tobey's Peter Parker, but SM3 destroyed the universe and any association to his character. ASM follows the universe in a cleaner more open fashion and more importantly it's version of 'Spider-Man' is damn near spot on, way ahead of Raimi's. As movies they do nothing more than function as set dressing for 'insert super hero here', though I'll give you Spider-man 2. And really, Hipster?

He dresses in skinny jeans, striped socks, wears glasses just cuz, and has his hair slicked up like Edward Cullen. Not a full on hipster, more like someone who's trying to pull off the look but isn't getting it. Doesn't help that Peter wasn't so much shown as the shy underdog that didn't speak up because he felt he couldn't do anything, but rather like he just bit off more than he could chew in challenging Flash Thompson. Honestly, it felt like almost everybody in AMS was better written except Peter and The Lizard.

I don't think it did. Yes, it was a mistake to kill Venom and Topher Grace was a terrible choice for Eddie Brock, but honestly I'm willing to bet they were planning to make it so that was a fake-out or the symbiote didn't die.

And again, I don't think it was. Yes, more wisecracks are more Spider-man, but at the same time having Peter go out searching for the guy that killed Uncle Ben and never finding him? That's not Spider-man's story, that's Batman Begins! The whole setup for killing Ben just felt so rushed too, and was done far better in Raimi's version. That was genuinely tear-jerking, in AMS it happened so quickly it barely felt like Peter had anything to do with it and made him seem more like a petty asshole than someone who you could sympathise with for getting so badly ripped off.

Spiderman 3 did less to destroy the Spiderman universe than it did just take things in a different direction. It had a lot of flaws but it wasn't as bad as a lot of people make it out to be. It could have continued and could have had an out for Venom by simply having the symbiote hide for a while and then either jump to Mac Gargon or skip him and go to Flash.

Semantics about things that can't happen now though. Short version is I don't like AMS and think Spiderman 3 is better than most think it is, and while AMS2 is looking better I'm still not having high hopes because I'd rather Sony just sell the rights back to Marvel.