divenax.blogg.se

Now, let’s be clear: $709 million isn’t chump change, and the film still turned a profit. It earned both the series’ lowest Rotten Tomatoes score (52 percent) and its smallest box office ( $709 million). The movie was subsequently dismissed as a mess by most critics and even some audience members. It also deliberately introduced characters and story beats only to leave them dangling as sequel bait. It’s why The Amazing Spider-Man 2 is overstuffed with villains (Electro, New Goblin, Rhino), tangled up in plotlines, and how it could still find room to jam one of the most iconic moments in comic book history (the death of Gwen Stacy, played here by Emma Stone) into one film. The Amazing Spider-Man 2 was supposed to build on that, with Garfield established in the role and a slate of new villains designed to begin building out what Sony Pictures (then, as now, the rights-holders to Spider-Man and associated characters) hoped would become a Spider-Man Cinematic Universe–even if it was based around one superhero (Spidey) and a whole slew of supervillains.īut The Amazing Spider-Man 2 fell prey to the greedy kind of Hollywood thinking that prefers shared universes to spring up instantly instead of letting them slowly take root and grow. In a new interview with Variety, Garfield talked about what it took for him to sign on for the film, acting alongside Tom Holland and Tobey Maguire, and if he'd ever return to the role again.The reasons why we never got The Amazing Spider-Man 3 are many, but perhaps the primary factor, as it always seems to be in Hollywood, was money.Īrriving five years after the end of the Tobey Maguire/Sam Raimi era of Spider-Man movies, which was capped by 2007’s critically divisive Spider-Man 3 earning a healthy $895 million worldwide, 2012’s The Amazing Spider-Man introduced Garfield as Peter Parker, retold the origin story yet again and managed to haul in a very respectable $758 million at the box office–not as much as the Maguire movies, but still profitable and seen as a win considering it was a full-fledged reboot of the franchise. After journalists badgered the poor man for months about his rumored involvement in No Way Home -and he repeatedly denied the gossip -Garfield finally surfaced admit that, yes, he is in No Way Home.

Or, like many other web-heads, you were somewhat surprised that Andrew Garfield-whose The Amazing Spider-Man films were long criticized-was of the best parts of the film, and left theaters wanting to see his Spidey again.įor those of you in the we-want-more-Andrew-Garfield camp, we have some good news.

Or you vowed to visit the real-life donut shop featured in the film. Maybe you wanted to immediately see it again, this time with more popcorn. If you are one of the lucky millions who saw Spider-Man: No Way Home, we're sure you had more than a few takeaways after viewing. This story contains spoilers for Spider-Man: No Way Home.