Marvel President Alan Fine wanted to burn The Amazing Spider-Man 2's script after reading it

[AJBopp]

I highly doubt Marvel would unmask Spider-Man in the movie; they did it in the comics and they had to retcon almost immediately so they should know it's a bad idea. Like you said, his secret identity is a part of his mythos, I can't imagine them changing that one their right off the bat with the character.

You make it sound like the unmasking was a move they regretted. They didn't have to retcon it, they didn't even actually retcon it. The whole purpose for the unmasking was to provide a rationale, however weak, to do the deal with Mephisto. The point was not to undo the unmasking, but to undo the marriage.

[rhymeswithparc]

You make it sound like the unmasking was a move they regretted. They didn't have to retcon it, they didn't even actually retcon it. The whole purpose for the unmasking was to provide a rationale, however weak, to do the deal with Mephisto. The point was not to undo the unmasking, but to undo the marriage.

I guess but that still means that they had no intention of actually making his identity public. It might not be something they regret but it is something they retconned out for whatever reason.

[cyberhubbs]

They were gonna go with the secret identity as of BND, so they could get the publicity and hype of his identity going public for Civil War. So it worked in their favor.

[Mister Mets]

I guess but that still means that they had no intention of actually making his identity public. It might not be something they regret but it is something they retconned out for whatever reason.

They unmasked Spider-Man becasue they knew a retcon was coming that could reverse any developments.

It backfired a bit given how interested fans were in the story. The first issue of Back In Black resulted in JMS's best sales on Amazing Spider-Man, which is remarkable that the arc was essentially a last minute development. One More Day was supposed to come immediately after Civil War.

[Heasensy32]

Spidey first and foremost should be childish in personality, his character in the movies has been too damn soft spoken and girly instead of nerdy, awkward, and goofy.

[Agent Z]

Spidey first and foremost should be childish in personality, his character in the movies has been too damn soft spoken and girly instead of nerdy, awkward, and goofy.

And the difference is?

[Heasensy32]

And the difference is?

At least comic spidey compared to movie spidey was absolutely hilarious and sarcastic.

[Minerboh]

What bugs me the most is...if he didn't liked it, then why did he greenlighted it?
One of the reasons they dropped SM4 was the script.

[Spider-Chan]

What bugs me the most is...if he didn't liked it, then why did he greenlighted it?

Because he had nothing to do with the production. Sony are the ones that have final word on the movies, not Marvel. They probably just send him the script as a consultant, but they choose to ignore him anyway.

[Minerboh]

Oh, sorry. My bad!
I thought that he had some influence in the Sony movies.

[Agent Z]

At least comic spidey compared to movie spidey was absolutely hilarious and sarcastic.

I've heard this complaint before and I'll give my usual answer; comics and films are a different medium. You can get away with all that dialogue in comics because it's just moving pictures and words. In movies you have actors, music and lights and having a character cracking wise every second, especially during fight scenes, will get real old, real fast. Besides I cared enough about Peter that I wasn't bothered about how much he could make me laugh, especially when there were moments I wasn't supposed to be laughing.

[marvelprince]

As much as I like to see miles in live action having him as a replacement is not a good idea and is incredibly pointless and tasteless. It's like replacing Matt Murdock with that kid daredevil in the ultimate universe because ben affleck was terrible. It doesn't work that way.

As for garfield, no he pretty much captures Peter. Peter isn't exactly like maguire who was dory eyed for a majority of the movie and barely had any bones to show abd spiderman is very rash and arrogant.

Ultimate Daredevil had nothing to do with Affleck. Both were terrible ideas, but terrible independent ideas. I think the emails from Fine highlights exactly why Miles would be a great idea. Right away, you free yourself form the spectre of the previous movies. Thats the good, and the bad aspects them. Plus you're free to use Peter as much or as little as you want, while not having to worry about telling a story thats been told a million times before along.

[AJBopp]

Ultimate Daredevil had nothing to do with Affleck. Both were terrible ideas, but terrible independent ideas. I think the emails from Fine highlights exactly why Miles would be a great idea. Right away, you free yourself form the spectre of the previous movies. Thats the good, and the bad aspects them. Plus you're free to use Peter as much or as little as you want, while not having to worry about telling a story thats been told a million times before along.

I think his point was that just as replacing Affleck with Ultimate Daredevil would be terrible, independent ideas, replacing Peter with Miles would be terrible, independent ideas - and he's right. You don't fix Spider-man by taking away Peter, however much it might free you from whatever perceived baggage there is. Fine is completely off the mark on this idea, and whatever wrong ideas Sony had, they were right to reject this hairbrained scheme.

[marvelprince]

I think his point was that just as replacing Affleck with Ultimate Daredevil would be terrible, independent ideas, replacing Peter with Miles would be terrible, independent ideas - and he's right. You don't fix Spider-man by taking away Peter, however much it might free you from whatever perceived baggage there is. Fine is completely off the mark on this idea, and whatever wrong ideas Sony had, they were right to reject this hairbrained scheme.

No replacing Daredevil with Ultimate Daredevil would be a bad idea cause Ultimate Daredevil is a terrible character. That said, if I had made 5 movies with the same lead character, different actors but with diminishing returns I would look for a way to do something fresh. Miles could be that. And sorry, I won't accept its a bad idea because he's not Peter or we shouldn't replace characters cause because reasons thats why. With that kind of attitude we'll get the same cycle of characters repeated again and again with the same origins told over and over. EVERYONE alreadys knows Peter Parker, Uncle Ben, Great Power, yadda yadda. This is Alan's point that Sony clearly didn't get as the reboot wasted way too much retreading ground that for the most part the audience is already familiar with. Peter and his story is so well known why are you wasting time revisiting the origin again? What he haven't examined before is how Peter manages to actually succeed as a hero, win the admiration and trust of the city that used to hate him, fall a heroes death and inspire others to take up his cause. Prolly won't happen, but I have to see a compelling reason here or otherwise why it couldn't work.

[BlueFlight]

He shouldn't completely childish. Peter should be a mature young man with goofy, playful characteristics. As Spider-Man his silliness and playfulness comes out more strongly.